2007
Dec 8

[The following is an article by Brant Hansen, reprinted here with his permission.  I would venture to say there there are some lessons within for all of us.   Really.]

AlqaedapicthingAlan, in his book, points out that Al-Qaeda is almost impossible to stop.  This is, in large part, due to the way its message works, and the way the work gets carried out.  And he’s absolutely right.

So, in the service of national defense, I propose the following, in order to effectively neutralize the movement.  Let’s get Al-Qaeda to…

1)  Complexify the message

Right now, it’s so simple, it can pass from one to the next, and be easily grasped by the uneducated, the young — everyone.  This is dangerous, because it’s highly contagious, and people on the street feel capable of enlisting others in the cause.

2)  Construct a less “flat”, more hierarchical structure

Currently, small, underground groups can move nimbly and autonomously, complicating efforts to thwart them.  A more regimented, stratified approach, where some members are left thinking, “I can’t know enough to do anything” would bring the movement to a halt.

3)  Foster “expert” culture, and barriers to entry to the expert class

Promote the idea that the message is not only highly complex, but only some can truly understand it.  Construct extensive barriers to entry to the presumed expert class.  Promote idea that cells lacking a certified member of expert class, it is not equipped to be activated.

4) Focus on knowledge, rather than doing

Complexification and expert-class development will make cells spend immense amounts of time studying the work, even debating theories of the work, rather than doing it.  Better yet…

5) Equate STUDYING the work with the work itself

The cells are called to ACT, of course.  But if we can convince operatives that the work, itself, is in trying to understand the complexity of the work?  They’ll be effectively neutered.  We need to get them to spend large amounts of time in study, gathering to study, believing they don’t know enough, hiring new experts to teach them again and again, and attending teaching events.

They’ll actually believe they’re doing their work when they attend events held by experts.  This will render the cell, and the whole movement, harmless!  Convince them that the most radicalized, militant among them are merely called to bring other non-activated members to the cell events.

6) Sabotage cell multiplication

VERY important!  Cells that operate under simple principles, with motivated operatives, devoted to multiplication?  Very, very dangerous, fast-growing, and pop-culture endangering.  We must stop this in its tracks, and this is done in multiple ways:

A)  Foster egos and small-time celebrity.  By convincing operatives to set up individual fiefdoms, fewer autonomous cells will be activated.  Rather, the emphasis will be on building larger individual cells with numerous unactivated members.

B)  Make the basic structure highly difficult to replicate.  Al-Qaeda cells currently are, by necessity, simply-structured and easily replicated.  Propagate idea that for cells to begin, planning, experts and capital must be simultaneously accumulated.  Expert motivational speakers will be necessary, plus paid staff with highly specific training and talents.  Operatives will see massively “successful” large cells, and attempt to duplicate them, with very limited success because of the huge inputs required.  This will greatly inhibit growth.

C)  Convince philosophically-aligned, but non-active, members to choose from among most entertaining, high quality, cells that offer services for them. Not only will this engender a harmless, internal focus, it will require IMMENSE amounts of resources and energy.

7) Make operatives really, really busy.

Replace simple, animating mission with lengthy lists, charts, and programs for cell maintanance.  Convince them that this institutional maintenance is, actually, the mission, itself.

This will leave them will no actual time for conducting actual mission.

8)  Get Al-Qaeda to seek governmental approval.

Offer tax incentives if necessary.  The larger cells, requiring large edifices, will also require tremendous amounts of capital.  This will also allow a measure of control, to threaten the cell’s tax status, thereby threatening funds for internal programs, when necessary.

Better:  They’ll consider actual operational cells that exist without this governmental approval to be, themselves, invalid!

9)  Co-opt Al-Qaeda with the larger culture.

Once members are convinced that cell maintenance and study are actually their “mission”, the rest of their lives can be harmlessly integrated with the culture at large.  They’ll be indistinguishable from non-members, and, because of their new understanding of “mission”, effectively equivalent to non-members.

10)  Convince members to wear Al-Qaeda t-shirts with funny sayings and stuff.

Mission accomplished.

It’ll work to thwart an evil message.  It even works with the good ones.

Must a Joyful Noise be a Beautiful One?

Posted by Chris L on Dec 8th, 2007
2007
Dec 8

All your bass are belong to usI daresay I am probably going to call down the wrath of the Sanhedrin of Laodicea for bringing this up, but the recent conversation about the anonymous version of “O Holy Night” raised some interesting points. I have to say I was rather surprised at the number of professing Christians who got their knickers in a twist, treating a song of questionable origin that was not sung for the purpose of dishonoring God as if it were holy writ being spat upon. Bizarre.

Perhaps one of the basic questions to come out of this is “Must a joyful noise be a beautiful one?” One of the Laodicean commenters wrote:

God is a God of order, and if He has not given the talent to sing, you should not try to sing.

To which I wondered where this view was scripturally supported (aside from the book of II Opinions). Of all the replies to this gentleman and a number of other Schleuterites, probably the best one was given by Julie:

I don’t get how this is seen as mocking the subject matter of the song, but rather, the singer either mocking himself or allowing his non-ability to be mocked.

If we’re going to open that little can of worms, fine.

Is every bad piece of Christian music a mockery? Every flawed, non-professional grade, fully orchestrated effort of music by a Christian a mockery of the Creator who perhaps didn’t bother to install a tuner on the voice box? What’s our little litmus test here, as to what’s “good enough” of a performance to be considered honoring, and what’s a mockery with demons cackling and shame following? Is it a matter of the heart? Can we determine that matter of heart, via MP3 playback, if this was a serious effort or not? Can we not all say we know some terrible singers who don’t care and just sing out joyfully and full-bore?

I know that Ingrid prides her husband for his classically trained trumpet efforts and all the work he’s put into it and how valuable all of this work and mastery is to God, as if that somehow makes it more pleasing an aroma as an offering to God. Cain* had some fine, lovely vegetables, I heard. Big whoop. I’ve yet to find a verse that delineates the definition of singing and praising and worshiping and anything else to only those who have mastered some musical instrument or skill or are determined by the human audience without a direct line to the heart and mind as to what they are thinking and feeling as they are making that music.

So, since we do not know the story behind this, and it makes us laugh because it sounds terrible but not because we enjoy some bizarre assumption of mockery, we are with cackling demons.

That’s just stupid.

Amen, Julie.

But perhaps we should look at some REAL examples and ask - must a joyful noise be a beautiful one? If it is not, is it ever acceptable to laugh?

Example #1: One of the commenters posted a link to the video below with the question “what do you do with this?”

I have to say, I was uncomfortable from the vast array of emotions this brought up. I felt embarrassed for the gentleman, imagining myself in his place. I felt moved because his heart seemed to be into the singing much more than a lot of Sunday morning pew-riders I’ve known over the years. I chuckled, because some of the added words were indeed humorous. I felt sheepishly guilty for chuckling. I felt myself agreeing a bit with the “amen”s in the congregation. The whole gamut. But in all of that, I could not even fathom agreeing with Ingrid’s lackey’s comment above.

Examples #2+: A music minister (the same one that gave me O Holy Night) gave me a disc he had received from a friend at a Christian recording studio. On that disc were a number of songs that had been submitted as ‘demos’ for consideration for publication. As such, the singers had to know (you would think) that their work would have to be critiqued. A number of them are hilarious from a “what were they thinking?” standpoint, but at the same time, I would say that a number of them were joyful (though poor quality as determined by human beings - even those that have never heard music before) noises to the Lord.

  1. “Kill me, Kill me, Kill me” - You must listen through to the chorus
  2. Hot Summer Nights - Really, what was he thinking, submitting this to a CHRISTIAN label?
  3. I Am a Man - Yup
  4. That’s Peculiar - And again, Yup
  5. Oh Lord (with a LONG introduction from the artist) - You know the drill…
  6. O Nightingale - O, indeed, I believe my ears are still bleeding
  7. Our God is an Awesome God - I loved Rich Mullins, and I’m so glad he never heard this
  8. We Are the Champions (of God) - Freddy Mercury, eat your heart out. No - really…
  9. His Eye is on the Sparrow - I really had to wonder if they played this recording for any of their friends. If so, with friends like those…
  10. Chock Full of Love - the first, and probably last, time you’ll ever hear the word “chock” in a song. The tune, itself, may end up playing on your ‘head radio’, so proceed with caution!
  11. Satan, You Lost, Lost, Lost - Think “first week of American Idol”
  12. Soul Saved Tonight - there are a plethora of reasons that secular songs should not be completely rewritten for Christian audiences. This is one of them. If you ever want to listen to your Eagles’ albums again with untarnished nostalgia, do not listen to this. Seriously. I warned you…
  13. Amazing Grace - If you were going to submit a demo tape to a record company, wouldn’t you want to remember the words? And if you didn’t remember them, wouldn’t you want to record them over until you got them right? Hm?
  14. We Want to Fish For Men - I am guessing this is part of a larger work. I hope I’m wrong.
  15. God Give the Devil the Measles - This is actually a quality song with cheesy lyrics. I once put together a video of this with a friend and some staff members during break time as a way to entertain some campers (and demonstrate some video techniques). Here is that monstrosity (yes, that’s me with the guitar at the beginning, my wife popping out of the trailer, and my son with the painted stomach.)
  16. Holy Jerusalem - Can anyone explain to me what happened here?
  17. Come Back America - scary stuff
  18. Safe Sex Rap - some words you never thought you’d hear in a Christian song (and not because they’re naughty)
  19. Thank You, God - Really weirdness
  20. Jesus is About to Rap This Up (Bonus Track) - Something to make dispensationalism just a little bit more wacky…

There were a few more, but I couldn’t find them online (and I don’t have the server space to host them), so you’ll just have to trust me that they’re more of the same.

What do y’all think? (NOTE: If you are going to be critical, please read this article first and couch your criticism/accusation as either an “Absolute”, a “Conviction” or a “Preference”. If you don’t do this, I probably won’t take you all that seriously, because you really are just wanting to self-righteously spout off and not dialog. If that’s what you’re looking for, start a blog and ask Ingrid for advice on your writing.)